What type of kid does Sidwell look for?

[Anonymous]

I thought you had to be a legacy, a sibling, a media celebrity or part of the Obama Administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You had me until you decided to insult everyone else's children. I can imagine what the other moms think of you.

Why would I care what other moms think of me? I'm not in high school.

The schools care quite a lot if you come in with an arrogant attitude. They don't want pain-in-the-ass (PITA) parents, especially in ES where it's as much about the family as about the kid. If you're a PITA parent, it will probably show through in the parent interview.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought you had to be a legacy, a sibling, a media celebrity or part of the Obama Administration.

Maybe not completely true, although certainly somewhat true. This is in keeping with the point that, for younger admissions, the schools care as much about the family as about the kid.

[Anonymous]

My DS and other children that I've observed with his temperament are considered "pleasers?" LOL. Nothing at all wrong with their mannerliness, use of commonsense, intelligence level or social and leadership skills.

Personally, I can't stand children (5+) who smirk, throw tantrums just because, make smart ass comments, and question every fricken thing because mom/dad tells them all the time how brilliant they are. These are the children that lack emotional intelligence and I'm grateful that admission staff can spot them as soon as they walk in and slam the front door loudly at their playdate.

[Anonymous]

I think the OP is talking about her pre-K aged child. Not 5+ yrs old PP. And she didn't write anything about tantrums either. Why don't people actually read other people's posts?

[Anonymous]

Not the poster you're responding to, but good manners is part of emotional intelligence, and teaching it starts in pre-K. The difference is between being *engaged* and *enthusiastic* and being rude and arrogant. Take it from the mom of a kid with a kid with genius-level IQ who constantly gets complimented by teachers for his engaged and enthusiastic participation.

[Anonymous]

Sidwell is harder to get into than an Ivy. My child was waitlisted at Sidwell 6 years ago (never got off the list) and is now at Princeton. Sidwell can pick whomever they want. They have so many great applicants to choose from.

[Anonymous]

To answer the original question, Sidwell is a great place for independent thinkers, and has many of them. Lots of leaders, lots of kids who think "outside the box", lots of kids who ask interesting questions. And plenty of kids who are more "go withthe flow".

However, that only speaks to whether your son might fit in there, not whether he would be a likely candidate for admission. I would imagine it would depend on how he comes across in a playdate/interview, and that would depend on how your description of him tracks with how others see him. So if you think he is interesting and curious, others might agree, or might see him as a smarta**. If you see him as verbally confident, particularly as the only child of very verbal parents, others might agree, or might think that he never shuts up, or that he refuses to follow routines without a detailed justification every single time. The first kid would be an asset, the second a pain to have in a classroom.

[Anonymous]

Sidwell is harder to get into than an Ivy. My child was waitlisted at Sidwell 6 years ago (never got off the list) and is now at Princeton. Sidwell can pick whomever they want. They have so many great applicants to choose from.

Particularly, since they can pick from the full spectrum of intellectual talent (girls and boys) unlike schools like Landon, STA and NCS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Particularly, since they can pick from the full spectrum of intellectual talent (girls and boys) unlike schools like Landon, STA and NCS.

Unnecessary catty swipe at the Cathedral schools. Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sidwell is harder to get into than an Ivy. My child was waitlisted at Sidwell 6 years ago (never got off the list) and is now at Princeton. Sidwell can pick whomever they want. They have so many great applicants to choose from.

Particularly, since they can pick from the full spectrum of intellectual talent (girls and boys) unlike schools like Landon, STA and NCS.

In the "Getting into St. Albans" thread somebody posted about how St. Albans has more national merit scholarship finalists than Sidwell, even though Sidwell has a larger graduating class size.

[Anonymous]

I'm the one whose kid is at P.U., but didn't get off the waitlist at Sidwell. I think folks should just realize that any of the top private schools in the area will serve your child well --- (and if you live in a good public school district -- that will work out well too). Don't sweat it if the child doesn't get into Sidwell...life will go on. And for the above poster -- splitting hairs between STA and Sidwell is really unnecessary. Both are great schools.

[Anonymous]

To the original questioner, my sense is that Sidwell wants kids who are super-smart but also well rounded. I call it the 'hail fellow well met' (or Princeton) syndrome. At the HS level, of all the kids admitted I've known, they all were smart and well rounded. The brilliant but quirky and arrogant one did not get in, the very smart obnoxious one did not get in, the sort-a regular one did not get in.
My DC did not get in a K, and I believe it was because we parents asked too many questions. We, of course, felt the questions were legitimate, but it elicited the dreaded'all our kids are special" response. I'm sure this will leada to attacks on me, but I thought I'd just offer a perception of an experience. In sum, kids should be extremely smart, polite (not interrupting in the playdate, for example), rounded - not quirky. Same of the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the original questioner, my sense is that Sidwell wants kids who are super-smart but also well rounded. I call it the 'hail fellow well met' (or Princeton) syndrome. At the HS level, of all the kids admitted I've known, they all were smart and well rounded. The brilliant but quirky and arrogant one did not get in, the very smart obnoxious one did not get in, the sort-a regular one did not get in.
My DC did not get in a K, and I believe it was because we parents asked too many questions. We, of course, felt the questions were legitimate, but it elicited the dreaded'all our kids are special" response. I'm sure this will leada to attacks on me, but I thought I'd just offer a perception of an experience. In sum, kids should be extremely smart, polite (not interrupting in the playdate, for example), rounded - not quirky. Same of the parents.

I don't know, my kid is in high school at Sidwell, and there are definitely some quirky kids, some of whom were admitted at 9th grade. I agree that the common variable is very smart, especially with the kids admitted at 7th grade or later, but I think the PP who said that each kid has some outstanding quality - athletics or arts or intensity - is more on the mark. The class is well rounded, but not every kid.

[Anonymous]

The class is well rounded, but not every kid.

Thanks, that so nicely sums up the process!